Workplace Loneliness Experience Among Older Professionals (Aged ≥50 Years) in the Context of Digitalization: Protocol for a Scoping Review
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Workplace loneliness-defined as the perceived absence of meaningful social relationships at work-can have a negative impact on the well-being, engagement, and productivity of employees. Older professionals (aged ≥50 years) may be particularly vulnerable to workplace loneliness in the context of accelerated digitalization, which may create obstacles to inclusion, communication, and collaboration. Despite growing interest in this phenomenon, no comprehensive synthesis has yet examined how digital tools and transformations affect loneliness among older workers or what interventions have been implemented to address it. OBJECTIVE: This scoping review aims to systematically map the existing literature on workplace loneliness among workers aged 50 years or older, with a particular focus on how digitalization influences these experiences. The review will also identify digital tools associated with loneliness and explore organizational interventions to reduce loneliness among this demographic. METHODS: This scoping review will follow the methodological framework by Arksey and O'Malley and the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) reporting guidelines. A comprehensive search will be conducted in multiple databases (MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, and APA PsycINFO) and gray literature. Eligible studies will (1) include workers aged 50 years or older, (2) address workplace loneliness or related constructs in professional contexts, and (3) be situated in digitalized work environments (eg, remote or hybrid work, digital tools, and information and communications technology systems). Study selection, data extraction, and quality assessment will be conducted independently by at least 2 reviewers. Data will be charted using a predefined template covering study characteristics, theoretical frameworks, the digital context, loneliness measures, and intervention strategies and synthesized narratively and thematically. RESULTS: As this is a scoping review protocol, results are not yet available. A preliminary search conducted in June to July 2025 across MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science yielded 450, 1, and 47 potentially relevant records, respectively. No systematic or scoping reviews were identified on workplace loneliness among older workers in digitalized contexts. One review addressed video calls for nonworking older adults, reporting very low-certainty evidence. The planned review will apply the PRISMA-ScR guidelines to synthesize evidence on digitalization's role in, technologies associated with, and organizational interventions to mitigate workplace loneliness for professionals aged 50 years or older. CONCLUSIONS: This scoping review will systematically examine how digitalization shapes workplace loneliness among professionals aged 50 years or older and identify organizational interventions that address it. The synthesis will refine conceptual understanding, highlight critical evidence gaps, and inform the development of socially supportive digital work environments for aging workforces. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Open Science Framework 6p4ak; https://osf.io/6p4ak. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/81843.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,072 | 0,067 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,006 | 0,006 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,016 | 0,019 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,017 | 0,012 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,007 | 0,005 |
| Communication savante | 0,008 | 0,009 |
| Science ouverte | 0,006 | 0,008 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,010 | 0,007 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,067 | 0,013 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».